Options
1896-O Barber Half PCGS AU50 CAC? Yes or No Anonymous Poll
amwldcoin
Posts: 11,269 ✭✭✭✭✭
Anonymous unless you care to comment.
1896-O Barber Half PCGS AU50 CAC? Yes or No Anonymous Poll
This is a private poll: no-one will see what you voted for.
1
Comments
Coyote Ugly was my first thought
I'll expose my ignorance:
The coin in the image is sort of attractive just not something I'd pick. The condition of the coin looks closer to a 56-57 weak strike, I'm going to bet that the graders net graded the coin due to eye-appeal. So, I think AU-50 is a good commercial grade for the coin. I have no "hands-on" experience with CAC coins as I have not seen enough to learn what JA likes. That said, the ONLY reason I can understand a CAC sticker on this slab is because it "looks" like the splotchy tarnish is original and the technical grade of the coin is higher than a fifty. I vote it has both.
I voted no.... Just based on looking at the hundreds of CAC coins posted here, I think it would not 'measure up' to the level for a green bean. Cheers, RickO
My guess is yes. For those who think otherwise, why not?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I did yes as it looks original and solid for a 50. Pretty, not particularly, but I think it qualifies for a bean.
My YouTube Channel
Actually in defense of the coin...it looks way nicer than the pictures and totally original.
I'm glad everyone is writing that it looks original in-hand and far nicer, as well, because in the single set of images that appear on my monitor it looks like an unattractive coin with secondary toning after an improperly rinsed dip. I voted "No" and stick with that vote even in the face of defense to the coin.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Of course. It's the lowest grade on the totem pole in the AU range. And why wouldn't JA see clearly that it is properly graded, if not possibly under graded ?
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
I also voted yes, so I can't say why they said no...BUT...
My reason for "yes" is JA's known love for "original skin". As @ricko could tell you, "original skin" can be ugly. So I imagine the people saying know are downgrading the coin for its mottled look which is the very reason that JA probably CAC'ed it.
Funny how the market works, isn't it?
I voted no. IMHO the coin does not look original, at least in the OP’s pictures.
EEK! Who would do that on purpose?!?!?
I didn't vote. I don't reside anywhere close to the CAC mind.
But, on the plus side, CAC does often reward originality. So "ugly" isn't really a disqualifier.
On the negative side, the spotty toning might NOT be considered original, but the result of a past dipping(?)
And the light ticks on the portrait, which the photograph gives the impression that they are fairly fresh, might be a negative. (But, I can't quite tell if they might be on the holder).
So, you can see why I didn't vote. Mixed signals.
I say 'yes', because I've seen lots of CAC goofiness.
Not attractive at all. Dipped, obverse hairlines? Hope the pics are just bad!
My guess is yes. For those who think otherwise, why not?
Overgraded. No better than XF-45 IMO. If broken out has too much wear for a judicious dipping. CAC not deserved.
Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
down right fugly
Not a coin that I would want.
@mr1874 said: "Overgraded. No better than XF-45 IMO. If broken out has too much wear for a judicious dipping. CAC not deserved."
Do you think XF-45 is an old-time standard. The reverse does look XF if you don't allow for its weakness. Besides, the OP has implied the grade is AU-50. I think asking the question when the coin is not graded AU is ONLY something I
would do to stir folks up..
I like original surfaces up to a point and this one is well within my tolerance, I like it so I said yes. Based on my own experience with CAC submissions, my opinion is nearly worthless, however.
That’s fine and understandable, but not what was asked.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I would grade it XF which is how i know it is AU even if the OP hadn't said so. Market grading and all...
That's how I often grade. I look at a coin, use my my personal old time grading standard and then "up it" so I'm in line with today's practice. Seems to work fine.
I said 'no.' My immediate reaction was is did not have decent eye appeal and the obverse has too many small hits on the portrait which are distracting. The reverse had odd and mottled toning which unappealing.
While the coin may grade AU-50, I don't think it's an 'A' or 'B' coin.
Had the OP not disclosed it was an AU-50, I would have guessed EF-45. Then again, the 1896-O may be known for a soft strike and it is a true AU-50.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
For those calling it an XF, go look at some of the MS examples to get an idea of how the strikes are on the majority of 96-O Halves.
The coin used to be in Walt Kennedy's Set. His comment about the coin is it is one of the nicest AU 96-O's he has seen. I will say most at this grade level are dipped white from my experience.
I'm going to go see what my whole slab shots look like as they are taken from a few inches further away and sometimes give a better look in hand. If they are different I will post them.
Here's the slab shots
Mark, I've been out of collecting for years now and trying to get back in but I was active when CAC came into existence. My understanding of CAC was that it was to provide an unbiased, unaffiliated approval of the graders designation and are exceptional, the best of the best examples of such grade. In my opinion, this coin is not that.
I voted no, only because I'm not really fluent in the strike issues for the specific coin. It is not ugly and certainly not fugly.
So now, I think we know for sure that the coin was graded AU-50 by PCGS. Now, we need to figure out if it has a CAC sticker.
The very short version is that they sticker what in their opinion are A and B quality coins for the grade, but not C coins. That seems considerably less stringent than what you stated to be your understanding.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
No - strike on obverse is very weak - many stars are flat. I know Q. David Bowers says graders ignore strike.
Lowest numbers of CACs are given to Barber Halves in AU50 - 52 versus 98 in 53 190 /55 & 436/ 58.
Not a cheap coin - PCGS places value at:
$2,750 AU50 POP 11 CAC 0
$3,150 AU53 POP 8 CAC 1
$4,500 AU55 POP 11 CAC 5
$6,500 AU58 POP 6 CAC 1
I guess I would ask for the money, why not hold out for a AU53.
Bottom line if a coin has a CAC and is pretty, you've got something. Otherwise, why just fill a hole?
Just to give you an idea about Priceguide...until 2 were overgraded last year in 58...the previous 4 all sold for over 10K! I don't know of any XF45...much less AU selling for what PG shows for an AU50!
Check PCGS AUCTION PRICES -
2019 January 9 - 14 FUN US Coins Signature Auction - Orlando #1291
LOT #3519 |
Sold for: $2,880.00
1896-O 50C AU50 PCGS....
That's a better struck coin with more wear than this 1 and it still brought more than PG!
CU is NOT a fantasy worid. The guys at PCGS and CAC are not elves.
@DisneyFan said: "I guess I would ask for the money, why not hold out for a AU53."
Great point! In fact some, including me, would price this coin as a 53 or 55. IMO, eventually it will be upgraded to those levels.
@DisneyFan continued: "Bottom line if a coin has a CAC and is pretty, you've got something. Otherwise, why just fill a hole?
I don't know who Walt Kennedy is or his experience as a collector but in his opinion, "...it is one of the nicest
AU 96-O's seen" is a pretty good reason this coin is NOT a "hole filler" although he used it as one for a while.
The PCGS Price Guide is just a guide. The interesting thing is an AU50 was a $750 coin ten years ago according to the PCGS Price Guide. So is it necessary for a long time holder to push the envelope on grade or price? And by pushing the envelope are we reducing the chance of a CAC?
Your pricing information has added perspective to the discussion.
PCGS Price Guide has always been way low on Barber Half's(while nowadays some of the recently graded crap is probably on par with priceguide). I remember buying a nice XF years ago at a show(15?) with a guy I know sitting there licking his chops hoping I would buy the coin. I bought the coin and could've easily sold it to him for a Grand. Let's just say I sold it to him very close to your AU price and it was raw!
The reverse does look XF if you don't allow for its weakness.
The "L" and "I" in "LIBERTY" are not really there either.
Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
Walt moved on to another series and sold his set(I bought at least 1/2 his set when he sold it). This 1 sat in a set for maybe 6 years after and I bought his set.
You ought to listen to yourselves people. I would say what I thought, but don't want to get banned.
It's a very nice coin Darrell.
This would be a great coin for a trueview as I'm not all that great with pictures. Bet a trueview would change some opinions here!
Look at the heritage example which is better struck! The reverse is weaker in the high point...feather tips. Liberty is all there...that's my pictures.
Voted no. Yes an AU50 but perhaps a plus rather than the CAC. I further feel that the lack of detail to be more from worn dies rather than simply the very common weak strike of the New Orleans Mint.
I voted no. Meat wise, it would pass CAC. The surfaces however, at least from the pics look unoriginal and unattractive. The slab pics look a bit better so perhaps it is just the images. 96-O is one of the toughest midgrade barber halves to find nice and this one appears to be no different.
siliconvalleycoins.com
It’s a nice original coin, seems problem free. I believe it will sticker. I like it - a good one and fills the hole quite nicely.
Er, what?
Due to a recent warning, I'll need to refine my comments. So, I am of the opinion that you may wish to take another quick look at the "Liberty."
Unfortunately for me, in some cases, I cannot be sure if a coin is weakly struck or struck with worn dies. Do you see something on the coin that formed your opinion?
I guessed yes and to my eye it looks to be a weak strike. The slab shots look better in my opinion.
Darrell
Good luck
Jim
I voted no. I don’t doubt the coin is at least AU50, but I’m in the camp that the coin was at some time dipped and secondary toning is forming. From the limited experience I have with CAC that doesn’t bode well for a sticker.
That and the devil on my shoulder is telling me the OP is using a very nice coin that was possibly rejected by the bean factory to point out flaws in the business.
My Ebay Store
I say it meets a 'B' for a 50. So it should sticker.
I'll start by saying the coin didn't CAC(unless there was some collusion as I sold the coin with the condition I would refund $500 if it didn't CAC making it not worth buying and selling). I've learned there are some close ties.
@TomB I'm actually shocked at your comment! While my pictures don't do the coin justice there is no way I could say what you did from the pictures! BTW this coin has been in the same holder for well over 10 years and hasn't changed a bit...that would not be the case from your statement!
For those debating die wear vrs. strike. Just look at the pancaked stars on the Obv. That's the 1st place I look to determine how well a Barber Half is stuck. 96-O's are notoriously not well struck as are many New Orleans Barber Half's.
As @Insider2 posted. The surfaces of this coin are easily better than a 50. What the pictures doesn't show is the nice original luster beaming through the nice original toning. I really wish I still had the coin so I could take some glamour shots. Most who have bought from me know the majority of what I sell are much nicer than my pictures. I had a choice with this coin. Look like it looks in my pictures now or make it look too nice. I always choose not to make my coins look better than they do in my pictures.
In conclusion...after seeing many Barber Half's I don't like with a CAC sticker. I'm happy JA is keeping some of you from buying those he doesn't Bean or personally like! The buyer's comment when I asked what he thought about the coin when he received it? "Nice Coin!" He had the option to return it but kept it with no hesitation.
I'm now solidly anti CAC! I challenge anyone to find a nicer AU50 96-O Barber Half in a PCGS 50 holder. The coin @DisneyFan posted is a 45 that is not original. Most of the 50-53 96-O Barber Halves I've seen are dipped white lack luster coins.
I'm off my soapbox now!